Talk:Potion
Targeting potions Can potions be applied to items? (E.g. Bless potion on crossbow bolts) Harleyquin 19:26, 5 Dec 2005 (PST) *I just tested and wasn't able to get it to work. -- Austicke 20:34, 5 Dec 2005 (PST) *You cannot use a potion of bless on bolts. However, I don't recall if you are able to use bless off of items such as the Scabbard of Blessing onto the bolts -- my initial hunch is you can but I don't recall for sure. I do know though that the potions thing is definitely a no go. -- Dae-Glyth 05:46, 6 Dec 2005 (PST) :*I just tested; you can use other Bless items on bolts (such as Scabbard of Blessing). -- Austicke 08:27, 6 Dec 2005 (PST) *Thanks for the help. Should be probably be added as a note in the potions entry. Harleyquin 19:09, 6 Dec 2005 (PST) :*Done. -- Austicke 09:44, 7 Dec 2005 (PST) *Both my Wizards and my Clerics are in the habit of brewing potions of Flame Weapon or DarkFire. These can then be used on their weapons. They can also be givin to team members to use on their weapons. Grom56 03:55, February 1, 2010 (UTC) :* Using your potions on your weapons would mean activating the potion then clicking on the weapon in question. It does not mean using the potion on yourself and having the spell affect your weapons (because the spell allows targeting a creature in order to affect its weapons). Potions cannot be used on weapons; they automatically target the imbiber. --The Krit 14:58, February 1, 2010 (UTC) Adding other potions here? should potions be added here like i did with some weapons/armor/gloves? you probably don't want to see a page for every potion right? just asking to make sure:) thx --Pimpernell 03:00, August 5, 2011 (UTC) * Potions are just containers for spells. Since we have category:spells, I see no reason to list any of them here. --The Krit 13:07, August 31, 2011 (UTC) Divine might/shield oddity As a strange occurrence, if a player feeds an associate a potion of divine might/shield, he will use one of his own turn undead attempts to bestow the benefit on the fed creature. Since the feat cannot normally target another creature, this is the only way to give such a benefit without requiring the targeted creature to actually have the turn undead feat to use. However, there is a qualification that in order to successfully use/feed this potion, the player will need to have turn undead ready, and not have the feat (divine might/shield) associated with the potion. WhiZard (talk) 19:12, October 18, 2014 (UTC) * Since there are no standard potions of these, I was going to ignore them for this article. The divine might/shield articles mention that turn undead will be consumed, and to me the rest seems rather trivial and not worth noting without a standard potion. (If someone thinks it is worth noting, I would suggest the divine might/shield articles instead of this one.) --The Krit (talk) 20:37, October 18, 2014 (UTC) :*I don't understand the oddity, WhiZard. Are you saying that potions of DS/DM can be brewed? I was under the impression that feat-oriented effects could not be brewed, only those that could be cast onto a bottle within the casting level limitations. If, however, the oddity is referring to custom-designed potions, then in that case, I would ignore documenting this formally since trying to encompass the consequences of custom-designed items would open the proverbial Pandora's box. But I am probably just not understanding the explanation fully. :( --Iconclast (talk) 03:22, October 20, 2014 (UTC) ::* You are correct. No feat can be used to craft a wand, or brew a potion, because there is no cast spell property assigned to any feat's spell ID in des_crft_spell (oddly, there is a normal invisibility scroll referenced for the Harper Scout's invisibility feat). My observation was along the lines of trivia. Not noteworthy for an article, but an odd fluke, nevertheless. WhiZard (talk) 03:54, October 21, 2014 (UTC) Range vs intent I had phrased the feeding subnote as "personal range" because that is something players can readily spot by checking a spell's description. I don't see how "were intended to target the caster" is better. Is that supposed to be a more precise description? I know it's not fully precise, given polymorph '''self' (the name says "self", yet the target is not OBJECT_SELF). --The Krit (talk) 20:39, October 18, 2014 (UTC) * It is a broader description, describing all spells (assignable to a potion) that would have the peculiarity of targeting the caster instead of the target. The broader phrasing allows people to have confidence that the list is complete, rather than trying to find out if there are spells not listed as "personal range" that might display this quirk. WhiZard (talk) 21:07, October 18, 2014 (UTC) :* I don't buy it. If a person trusts NWNWiki to produce a complete list, why would that person doubt a conclusion that all the spells in a certain list have "personal" range? If a person does not trust the completeness of a list, it does not matter whether or not conclusions are drawn from it. Someone who sees a list and decides to look for omissions will do so regardless of how broadly the list is described. And I welcome that; everyone, if it interests you, please do try to find spells not listed that display the quirk. The more people who verify something, the more confidence we can have in it. On the flip side, what you have done is taken away a nice easy-to-remember generalization that people can use when they forget the list. (Few people want to memorize big lists of things when playing a game.) Someone is playing the game, and they wonder if they should feed a certain potion to their associate. Was it on the list? Was it not? Oh I forget. But I know the spell, and it's range is not personal. I can feed it to my associate with confidence! Unless you take away that confidence with your broader phrasing. --The Krit (talk) 18:24, November 8, 2014 (UTC) ::* The list is just as long with the "personal" restriction as without. The non-personal ones show up in the brewed potions (or any extension of iprp_spells.2da or potion with a scripted item property added). So what is the easy to remember generalization? That all builder made potions with this quirk casts spells that have a personal range? The way it was originally stated did not imply that. It stated there was a problem with many personal and said nothing about those that were not personal. Sure I could add a note that says this list happens to only consist of personal spells, but that will not aid the builder who is selecting item properties in the Toolset, as the range is not displayed there. As for the player, there would be no way for him/her to know that the potion he received from any module was a potion created from the Toolset without a change in iprp_spells.2da. Further if you really think that more spells would have displayed the quirk if the restrictions were broadened, why would you also suggest that the "easy-to-remember generalization" was accurate? WhiZard (talk) 20:56, November 9, 2014 (UTC) :::* What restriction are you talking about? There was no restriction. --The Krit (talk) 08:11, November 10, 2014 (UTC) ::::* "Personal" was the restriction that you were maintaining. WhiZard (talk) 15:18, November 10, 2014 (UTC) :::::* No, "personal" is the characterization that I've been maintaining. It was not a restriction until you came along and misinterpreted it. --The Krit (talk) 02:26, November 11, 2014 (UTC) Potion targeting in henchman inventory I was curious as to how potions placed in henchman inventory would target its effect compared to feeding them on the same henchman. I expect the henchman AI would need to be modified to some extent in order to observe this. I have noticed that the AI for some caster type henchmen will use scrolls and wands though the mechanics have never been clear to me (I am referring to the default Bioware AIs within this context). It seems the casting items placed there are used randomly (no clear condition being recognized in-game) so I don't know how standard potions (other than heals) or brewed potions (or custom-designed ones, for that matter) are supposed to be "digested" by the applicable henchman AI. (Note: If anyone would reference the script IDs use by these default AIs, I may be able to discern what the designer(s) intended to happen with spell-casting items in general. I wouldn't know how to identify these scripts myself, unfortunately.) --Iconclast (talk) 03:50, October 20, 2014 (UTC) * The targeting quirk is not based on the henchman-master relationship. It is based on the caster being the one who decided the potion is to be used. When you decide to force your henchman to drink a potion, you are the caster. When your henchman decides it should use a potion (in its own inventory), the henchman is the caster. --The Krit (talk) 18:28, November 8, 2014 (UTC) Caster level for spell from potion How caster level for spell casted from potion is calculated? Szafirmag (talk) 16:05, August 31, 2016 (UTC) * It's specified, not calculated. See caster level: ''"For spells cast from items, the caster level is given in parentheses after the relevant item property." --The Krit (talk) 03:44, September 1, 2016 (UTC)